There's an interview on PC Gamer chatting with Jay Wilson and Wyatt Cheng of Blizzard about Diablo III and specifically the changes planned for the upcoming version 1.0.5 patch for their action/RPG. They discuss Crowd Control enhancements, collaborating with Blizzard's other development teams, their lack of subtlety when in comes to nerfs and buffs, the new Monster Power system, and a bit on The Infernal Machine.

Armengar wrote on Sep 23, 2012, 10:19:D3 isn't poor. IMHO it is an ok game. The long awaited Duke nukem sequel was poor. sword of the stars 2 on release was poor. And so far on every d3 topic on blues there have been d3 haters jumping on d2 is better so I'm just adding a bit of variation.

I feel that d3 was supposed to have the spirit of d2 but have enough difference to stand apart. I obviously say this as my opinion and everyone has their own. Perhaps I have been luckier than others or my expectations of a good game are lower.

Not trying to start a flame war, I'm just musing.

I'm thinking that if they have to go back and make it more like D2 anyway, why didn't they just go with that from the start? That's probably what makes people roll their eyes.

When they come back and say: 'Now we see that people like this aspect of the game and not this other one so much. So we're patching it in.'

And everyone is scratching their heads because this is exactly what was done in D2 a decade ago. You don't think it's crazy to have to do over so much of the game you had 10 years to get right from the start?

Despite his apology (based on getting caught), the person Jay Wilson killed whatever faith I had in Diablo 3. If Blizzard replaced him there may be some hope. In contrast, the developers at Runic Games are involved, passionate, and love to get feedback and criticism.

D3 isn't poor. IMHO it is an ok game. The long awaited Duke nukem sequel was poor. sword of the stars 2 on release was poor. And so far on every d3 topic on blues there have been d3 haters jumping on d2 is better so I'm just adding a bit of variation.

I feel that d3 was supposed to have the spirit of d2 but have enough difference to stand apart. I obviously say this as my opinion and everyone has their own. Perhaps I have been luckier than others or my expectations of a good game are lower.

Not trying to start a flame war, I'm just musing.

Its not the cough that carries you off but the coffin they carry you off in.

Armengar wrote on Sep 23, 2012, 04:48:Some people either played d2 after lod or after many patches. (or have rose tinted glasses) d2 was far from perfect for quite some time.

I don't understand this argument. Certainly your point is correct, D2 wasn't perfect, and got far better as time went on. But why does that mean that it's ok for D3 to be poor? They had an example of how to ensure their game was decent right there, in what changes were made to D2. Why would they go repeat the mistakes of the past, and need to fix things again? And why should we forgive them for doing so?

Variety is good and post release support and patching is also good. If you don't like it play something else, and I just don't understand (short of trolling) why people jump on the same argument about d2 every time

What arguments about D2? The only one who brought up D2 before you did was Wallshadows, and his only comment about it was that they are making loot changes (to D3) that bring the game closer to D2. So what "same argument about D2" are people supposedly jumping on?

Armengar wrote on Sep 23, 2012, 04:48:Variety is good and post release support and patching is also good. If you don't like it play something else, and I just don't understand (short of trolling) why people jump on the same argument about d2 every time

I think the issue isn't so much that people wanted it to be D2++ so much as recognizing D2 as a design plateau they could have built from rather than try to replace. Why should we have to deal with months of post-launch fixes and patches after so many years of development? For a lot of the same issues they already fixed in an older product.

Either way, I won't call D3 a bad game, but I won't call it a great one either.

Some people either played d2 after lod or after many patches. (or have rose tinted glasses) d2 was far from perfect for quite some time. I am liking d3, I don't have borderlands 2 or torchlight 2. I am welcoming these changes.

D3was far more bug free than d2 on launch. I remember the save game eating bugs. I might be lucky but d2 crashed more times for me (losing loot) than d3 has dropped or crashed (I'm not sure it HAS crashed for me yet in my 200 hours).

D3 is not d2 and was never going to be d2(lod) with new graphics. Sure it needed more on launch but in a mere 5 months it is a different game. What do people want though? It isn't like you a pay a subscription.

Variety is good and post release support and patching is also good. If you don't like it play something else, and I just don't understand (short of trolling) why people jump on the same argument about d2 every time

Its not the cough that carries you off but the coffin they carry you off in.

Beelzebud wrote on Sep 23, 2012, 03:56:After 2 days with Torchlight 2, my lvl 30 character has more "cool" gear than my 200+ hour witch doctor.

For a dedicated D3 fanboy this clearly bad game design

You have to WORK hours and hours and hours for your loot, you have to spend real money to earn something worthy, not just playing it like a casual mom and stumbling over fat loot minute after minute. What boring game is this?

As long as they're treating it like some e-sport that needs 100% balance, or tuning the drops to milk the AH this game will never be truly fun. I've sunk more time into than I care to admit, and have never found 1 useful legendary or set item. I can't help but think that without the RMAH they would be a little more forgiving with the idiot drop rates on those items.

After 2 days with Torchlight 2, my lvl 30 character has more "cool" gear than my 200+ hour witch doctor.

xXBatmanXx wrote on Sep 22, 2012, 21:19:hmmm...haven't played in a while, but after stepping back and thinking about it for about a month or so -- the auction house removes the reason to play the game....I don't see a reason to go back to it. Which is sad.

They need to patch in random levels.

Bats, most of us said that prior to release. ARPG's are all about loot, why bother playing when you can just buy items and if you're buying items with real money what's the point of even playing to begin with?

How will it affect the distribution of items? Like, can you find item level 63 stuff in earlier acts if you crank up Monster Power?

WC: No, that’s one of the things that’s on the table, but it’s not currently how it works. Currently, what we do provide is [increased] magic find and gold find. There’s also, whenever you get an item, there is a chance – fairly small, but it does increase with Monster Power – that you get a second item.

I hope you aren't planning on having these second items that drop be the same type that the nephalem bonus gives you: watered down attribute capped items that reinforce the impression that the majority of stuff found in the game is utter crap.

hmmm...haven't played in a while, but after stepping back and thinking about it for about a month or so -- the auction house removes the reason to play the game....I don't see a reason to go back to it. Which is sad.

rist3903 wrote on Sep 22, 2012, 14:29:Do you honestly expect this company with its track record of patching and tweaking their games for a decade past the release dates to just give up already? Eventually they will have a pretty good game.

Or an extremely well polished turd, depending on your point of view.

Don't see them giving up any time soon though.

Eventually they will have a pretty good game.

And then i ask.....why not from the start what kind of game creators are they?

What I find interesting about the new loot changes is that they are somewhat reflective of the way it worked in Diablo 2. They're actually starting to acknowledge efficiency and the fact that stomping mobs is actually what makes it fun. It's sad that they only came to terms with this now though and not right out of the box.

And for some people, killing faster is way more fun. I have friends who say, “You know, I really like taking my Act 3 Inferno into late Hell difficulty, because I just get to stomp stuff and it’s really fun. But it doesn’t give me good rewards.” Well, now you can go to a place that gives you good rewards and get to stomp stuff. And if you prefer something a little more challenging, you crank it up.

I guess his 'friends' have a much louder voice than nearly the entire community. He should just own up to his mistakes and maybe he'll get a little more credibility down the road...